---
{
  "layout": "main",
  "title": "WIKIPEDIA STRIKES BACK: The Official Response That Changed Everything",
  "description": "In an unprecedented move, Wikipedia's leadership and community have mounted a comprehensive defense against Grokipedia's attacks, highlighting fundamental advantages of human curation over AI generation while exposing the paradox of criticizing Wikipedia while depending on its content.",
  "keywords": "Wikipedia official response, Wikimedia Foundation, community defense, human vs AI curation, encyclopedia wars, knowledge management, digital trust",
  "path": "/analysis/wikipedia-official-response.html",
  "breadcrumbs": [
    {"label": "Deep Analysis", "href": "/analysis/"},
    {"label": "Wikipedia Response"
  ],
  "publishDate": "November 4, 2025",
  "author": "Policy Analysis Team",
  "category": "Strategic Response"
}
---

{{> breadcrumb}}

<article class="section pt-24">
  <div class="container">
    <div class="max-w-4xl mx-auto">
      <!-- Article Header -->
      <header class="mb-12">
        <div class="mb-6 flex items-center gap-4 text-sm text-muted-foreground">
          <span class="rounded-full bg-purple-100 dark:bg-purple-900/30 px-3 py-1 text-purple-600 dark:text-purple-400 font-medium">STRATEGIC ANALYSIS</span>
          <time datetime="2025-11-04">{{publishDate}}</time>
          <span>•</span>
          <span>14 min read</span>
        </div>

        <h1 class="heading-1 mb-6">Wikipedia Strikes Back: The Official Response That Changed Everything</h1>

        <p class="text-xl text-muted-foreground leading-relaxed">
          Facing unprecedented attacks from Elon Musk's Grokipedia project, Wikipedia has mounted a sophisticated multi-pronged response that exposes fundamental contradictions in the AI encyclopedia's premise while reinforcing Wikipedia's unique advantages in the digital knowledge ecosystem.
        </p>

        <!-- Strategic Overview -->
        <div class="mt-8 p-6 bg-purple-50 dark:bg-purple-950/20 border-l-4 border-purple-500 rounded-lg">
          <h3 class="text-lg font-semibold mb-4 text-purple-900 dark:text-purple-100">🎯 STRATEGIC RESPONSE OVERVIEW</h3>
          <ul class="space-y-3 text-sm text-purple-800 dark:text-purple-200">
            <li>• <strong>Wikimedia Foundation:</strong> Coordinated institutional messaging emphasizing human knowledge value</li>
            <li>• <strong>Community Response:</strong> Grassroots documentation and analysis of Grokipedia issues</li>
            <li>• <strong>Leadership Intervention:</strong> Jimmy Wales' unprecedented CNBC interview</li>
            <li>• <strong>Technical Analysis:</strong> Public demonstration of AI limitations</li>
            <li>• <strong>Philosophical Defense:</strong> Articulation of human curation advantages</li>
          </ul>
        </div>
      </header>

      <!-- Main Content -->
      <div class="prose prose-lg dark:prose-invert max-w-none">

        <h2>The Foundation's Calculated Response</h2>
        <p>
          When Elon Musk launched Grokipedia with direct attacks on Wikipedia's credibility and neutrality, the Wikimedia Foundation faced an unprecedented challenge. This wasn't just business competition—it was an existential threat to the world's largest collaborative knowledge project.
        </p>

        <p>
          Rather than descending into public mudslinging, the Foundation deployed a sophisticated strategy that combined understated confidence with pointed reminders of fundamental truths about knowledge creation.
        </p>

        <div class="bg-muted/50 p-6 rounded-lg my-8">
          <h4 class="font-semibold mb-3">🏛️ FOUNDATION STRATEGY ELEMENTS</h4>
          <ol class="space-y-3 text-sm text-muted-foreground">
            <li><strong>1. Dignified Restraint:</strong> Avoid direct confrontation while maintaining clear messaging</li>
            <li><strong>2. Emphasize Human Value:</strong> Highlight the irreplaceable role of human expertise</li>
            <li><strong>3. Point Out Irony:</strong> Subtly highlight dependency contradictions</li>
            <li><strong>4. Community Support:</strong> Enable volunteer responses while maintaining institutional distance</li>
            <li><strong>5>Long-term Focus:</strong> Emphasize sustainable knowledge creation over hype cycles</li>
          </ol>
        </div>

        <h2>The Killer Quote That Defined the Conflict</h2>
        <p>
          Perhaps the most devastating response came not from a lengthy press release, but from a single, carefully crafted statement that captured the fundamental paradox of Grokipedia's existence:
        </p>

        <blockquote class="border-l-4 border-purple-500 pl-6 italic my-8 bg-purple-50 dark:bg-purple-950/10 p-6 rounded-r-lg">
          "Wikipedia's knowledge is—and always will be—human. This human-created knowledge is what AI companies rely on to generate content; even AI encyclopedias need Wikipedia to exist."
          <footer class="text-sm mt-4 not-italic text-purple-600 dark:text-purple-400 font-medium">— Wikimedia Foundation Official Statement</footer>
        </blockquote>

        <h3>Why This Statement Was So Devastating</h3>
        <p>
          This concise response accomplished multiple strategic objectives simultaneously:
        </p>

        <div class="grid md:grid-cols-2 gap-6 my-8">
          <div class="p-6 bg-green-50 dark:bg-green-950/20 rounded-lg border border-green-200 dark:border-green-800">
            <h4 class="font-semibold mb-3 text-green-800 dark:text-green-200">✅ Strategic Wins Achieved</h4>
            <ul class="space-y-2 text-sm text-green-700 dark:text-green-300">
              <li>• Highlighted AI dependency on human knowledge</li>
              <li>• Emphasized Wikipedia's foundational role</li>
              <li>• Positioned human expertise as superior</li>
              <li>• Maintained dignified, confident tone</li>
              <li>• Avoided defensive or reactive posture</li>
            </ul>
          </div>
          <div class="p-6 bg-blue-50 dark:bg-blue-950/20 rounded-lg border border-blue-200 dark:border-blue-800">
            <h4 class="font-semibold mb-3 text-blue-800 dark:text-blue-200">🎯 Messaging Impact</h4>
            <ul class="space-y-2 text-sm text-blue-700 dark:text-blue-300">
              <li>• Undermined Grokipedia's replacement narrative</li>
              <li>• Reinforced Wikipedia's essential nature</li>
              <li>• Appealed to logic over emotion</li>
              <li>• Generated media pickup and amplification</li>
              <li>• Created shareable, quotable content</li>
            </ul>
          </div>
        </div>

        <h2>The Community Grassroots Response</h2>
        <p>
          While the Foundation maintained institutional restraint, Wikipedia's volunteer community mounted an unprecedented grassroots documentation effort that demonstrated Wikipedia's unique strengths:
        </p>

        <h3>The Grokipedia Wikipedia Article</h3>
        <p>
          Within hours of Grokipedia's launch, Wikipedia editors created a comprehensive article documenting the platform—a move that perfectly illustrated Wikipedia's commitment to neutral coverage even of competitors. The article included:
        </p>

        <div class="bg-muted/50 p-6 rounded-lg my-8">
          <h4 class="font-semibold mb-3">📚 WIKIPEDIA'S GROKIPEDIA COVERAGE</h4>
          <ul class="space-y-2 text-sm text-muted-foreground">
            <li>• <strong>Comprehensive Launch Documentation:</strong> Detailed timeline and feature analysis</li>
            <li>• <strong>Critical Reception Coverage:</strong> Balanced presentation of media criticism</li>
            <li>• <strong>Technical Issues Documentation:</strong> Factual reporting of accuracy problems</li>
            <li>• <strong>Content Dependency Analysis:</strong> Reporting on Wikipedia content usage</li>
            <li>• <strong>Neutral Point of View:</strong> Despite being a competitor, maintained NPOV standards</li>
          </ul>
        </div>

        <h3>Community Analysis Projects</h3>
        <p>
          Volunteer editors launched several independent analysis initiatives that demonstrated Wikipedia's collaborative intelligence at work:
        </p>

        <div class="space-y-6 my-8">
          <div class="p-6 bg-muted/50 rounded-lg border-l-4 border-yellow-500">
            <h5 class="font-semibold mb-2 text-foreground">🔍 Content Comparison Project</h5>
            <p class="text-sm text-muted-foreground">
              Volunteers systematically compared Grokipedia articles with Wikipedia sources, documenting instances of content copying and modification. This citizen journalism approach provided transparent, verifiable evidence of content dependencies.
            </p>
          </div>

          <div class="p-6 bg-muted/50 rounded-lg border-l-4 border-yellow-500">
            <h5 class="font-semibold mb-2 text-foreground">📊 Accuracy Tracking Initiative</h5>
            <p class="text-sm text-muted-foreground">
              Editors established ongoing monitoring of Grokipedia content accuracy, creating a public database of identified errors, hallucinations, and factual inaccuracies that demonstrated the challenges of AI-generated reference material.
            </p>
          </div>

          <div class="p-6 bg-muted/50 rounded-lg border-l-4 border-yellow-500">
            <h5 class="font-semibold mb-2 text-foreground">🎯 Bias Documentation Project</h5>
            <p class="text-sm text-muted-foreground">
              Community members documented ideological biases and content manipulation in Grokipedia articles, providing concrete examples that contradicted claims of AI neutrality and superiority.
            </p>
          </div>
        </div>

        <h2>Jimmy Wales' Decisive Intervention</h2>
        <p>
          The most significant development in Wikipedia's response strategy came when Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales broke his characteristic silence at the CNBC Technology Executive Council Summit. His intervention marked a fundamental escalation in Wikipedia's defensive posture.
        </p>

        <div class="bg-red-50 dark:bg-red-950/20 p-6 rounded-lg my-8 border-l-4 border-red-500">
          <h4 class="font-semibold mb-3 text-red-900 dark:text-red-100">🎤 WALES' STRATEGIC INTERVENTION</h4>
          <p class="text-sm text-red-800 dark:text-red-200 mb-4">Wales' CNBC appearance accomplished several critical objectives:</p>
          <ul class="space-y-2 text-sm text-red-700 dark:text-red-300">
            <li>• <strong>Technical Credibility:</strong> Leveraged founder's expertise to challenge AI capabilities</li>
            <li>• <strong>Media Amplification:</strong> Generated massive news coverage and social media engagement</li>
            <li>• <strong>Moral Authority:</strong> Spoke truth to power as Wikipedia's creator</li>
            <li>• <strong>Philosophical Defense:</strong> Articulated fundamental values of human knowledge curation</li>
            <li>• <strong>Direct Challenge:</strong> Forcefully rebutted specific accusations about bias and quality</li>
          </ul>
        </div>

        <h3>The "Massive Errors" Warning</h3>
        <p>
          Wales' most impactful contribution was his technical critique of AI limitations, delivered with the authority of someone who has overseen Wikipedia's technological evolution for 24 years:
        </p>

        <blockquote class="border-l-4 border-primary pl-6 italic my-8">
          "The LLMs he is using to write it are going to make massive errors. We know ChatGPT and all the other LLMs are not good enough to write Wiki entries... LLMs are not even up to the challenge of writing a wiki entry."
        </blockquote>

        <h2>The Philosophical Counterattack</h2>
        <p>
          Beyond technical and tactical responses, Wikipedia's leadership mounted a sophisticated philosophical defense that recentered the debate on fundamental questions about knowledge, truth, and human expertise.
        </p>

        <h3>Human Expertise as Irreplaceable</h3>
        <p>
          A key theme across Wikipedia's response was the emphasis on human expertise as fundamentally irreplaceable in knowledge creation. This argument resonated particularly strongly with educators, researchers, and information professionals who have watched with concern as AI systems claim to replicate human judgment.
        </p>

        <div class="bg-blue-50 dark:bg-blue-950/20 p-6 rounded-lg my-8 border-l-4 border-blue-500">
          <h4 class="font-semibold mb-3 text-blue-900 dark:text-blue-100">🧠 THE HUMAN ADVANTAGE ARGUMENT</h4>
          <p class="text-sm text-blue-800 dark:text-blue-200 mb-4">Wikipedia's response emphasized several uniquely human capabilities:</p>
          <div class="grid md:grid-cols-2 gap-4 text-sm">
            <div>
              <strong>Cognitive Abilities:</strong>
              <ul class="mt-2 space-y-1">
                <li>• Contextual understanding</li>
                <li>• Nuanced judgment</li>
                <li>• Cultural sensitivity</li>
                <li>• Ethical reasoning</li>
              </ul>
            </div>
            <div>
              <strong>Social Capabilities:</strong>
              <ul class="mt-2 space-y-1">
                <li>• Consensus building</li>
                <li>• Dispute resolution</li>
                <li>• Collaborative editing</li>
                <li>• Community governance</li>
              </ul>
            </div>
          </div>
        </div>

        <h2>The Transparency Defense</h2>
        <p>
          Perhaps Wikipedia's most powerful strategic advantage was its commitment to transparency—a quality fundamentally lacking in AI-generated content systems. Wikipedia's response consistently emphasized how transparency builds trust and enables quality control:
        </p>

        <div class="space-y-6 my-8">
          <div class="p-6 bg-green-50 dark:bg-green-950/20 rounded-lg border-l-4 border-green-500">
            <h5 class="font-semibold mb-2 text-green-900 dark:text-green-100">✅ Wikipedia's Transparency Features</h5>
            <ul class="space-y-2 text-sm text-green-800 dark:text-green-200">
              <li>• <strong>Complete Edit History:</strong> Every change tracked and attributed</li>
              <li>• <strong>Source Transparency:</strong> All citations and references openly documented</li>
              <li>• <strong>Discussion Records:</strong> Editorial debates and decisions publicly archived</li>
              <li>• <strong>Community Accountability:</strong> Editors responsible for contributions identified</li>
              <li>• <strong>Policy Transparency:</strong> All editorial guidelines publicly available</li>
            </ul>
          </div>

          <div class="p-6 bg-red-50 dark:bg-red-950/20 rounded-lg border-l-4 border-red-500">
            <h5 class="font-semibold mb-2 text-red-900 dark:text-red-100">❌ AI System Opacity Issues</h5>
            <ul class="space-y-2 text-sm text-red-800 dark:text-red-200">
              <li>• <strong>Hidden Training Data:</strong> Sources used for AI training undisclosed</li>
              <li>• <strong>Black Box Decisions:</strong> Content selection processes opaque</li>
              <li>• <strong>No Edit History:</strong> Content evolution cannot be tracked</li>
              <li>• <strong>Centralized Control:</strong> Editorial decisions made behind closed doors</li>
              <li>• <strong>Accountability Gaps:</strong> No clear responsibility for errors</li>
            </ul>
          </div>
        </div>

        <h2>The Community Resilience Factor</h2>
        <p>
          Wikipedia's response strategy leveraged a unique advantage that no corporate-owned platform can match: the resilience and dedication of its global volunteer community. This human factor proved decisive in several ways:
        </p>

        <h3>Rapid Response Capability</h3>
        <p>
          When Grokipedia launched, Wikipedia's community responded within hours—far faster than any corporate PR team could mobilize. Volunteers created documentation, analyzed content, and provided real-time critique that demonstrated the agility of distributed human intelligence.
        </p>

        <h3>Authentic Advocacy</h3>
        <p>
          Unlike corporate messaging, Wikipedia's defense came from thousands of authentic voices—editors who have invested years of their lives in building the knowledge commons. Their advocacy carried credibility that no paid spokesperson could match.
        </p>

        <div class="bg-muted/50 p-6 rounded-lg my-8">
          <h4 class="font-semibold mb-3">🌍 GLOBAL COMMUNITY STRENGTH</h4>
          <p class="text-sm text-muted-foreground mb-4">Wikipedia's response was powered by:</p>
          <div class="grid md:grid-cols-3 gap-4 text-center">
            <div>
              <div class="text-2xl font-bold text-primary mb-2">300,000+</div>
              <div class="text-sm text-muted-foreground">Active Editors</div>
            </div>
            <div>
              <div class="text-2xl font-bold text-primary mb-2">300+</div>
              <div class="text-sm text-muted-foreground">Languages</div>
            </div>
            <div>
              <div class="text-2xl font-bold text-primary mb-2">24 Years</div>
              <div class="text-sm text-muted-foreground">Community Building</div>
            </div>
          </div>
        </div>

        <h2>The Media Strategy Success</h2>
        <p>
          Wikipedia's response demonstrated sophisticated media management that amplified its message far beyond what organizational communications could achieve:
        </p>

        <ul>
          <li><strong>Thoughtful Op-Eds:</strong> Wikipedia contributors published analysis in major outlets</li>
          <li><strong>Expert Interviews:</strong> Technical experts provided detailed AI assessments</li>
          <li><strong>Data-Driven Analysis:</strong> Community research provided concrete evidence</li>
          <li><strong>Academic Partnerships:</strong> Scholars weighed in on knowledge creation questions</li>
          <li><strong>Industry Alliances:</strong> Library and information science communities offered support</li>
        </ul>

        <h2>The Long-Term Strategic Position</h2>
        <p>
          Beyond immediate crisis response, Wikipedia's leadership established a strategic position for the ongoing competition with AI-generated content:
        </p>

        <h3>Quality Over Hype</h3>
        <p>
          Wikipedia consistently emphasized its commitment to quality improvement over hype cycles. While AI systems launched with bold promises, Wikipedia highlighted its steady, transparent approach to reliability and accuracy.
        </p>

        <h3>Open Knowledge Commons</h3>
        <p>
          The response reinforced Wikipedia's role as a public good rather than a commercial product. This positioning resonated particularly strongly given growing concerns about corporate control of information platforms.
        </p>

        <div class="bg-purple-50 dark:bg-purple-950/20 p-6 rounded-lg my-8 border-l-4 border-purple-500">
          <h4 class="font-semibold mb-3 text-purple-900 dark:text-purple-100">🏆 COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES REINFORCED</h4>
          <ul class="space-y-2 text-sm text-purple-800 dark:text-purple-200">
            <li>• <strong>Trust:</strong> 24-year track record of reliability</li>
            <li>• <strong>Transparency:</strong> All processes open and auditable</li>
            <li>• <strong>Neutrality:</strong> Multi-perspective editorial balance</li>
            <li>• <strong>Accountability:</strong> Community governance and oversight</li>
            <li>• <strong>Sustainability:</strong> Non-profit mission-driven model</li>
            <li>• <strong>Global Reach:</strong> Truly international coverage and perspective</li>
          </ul>
        </div>

        <h2>Measuring Response Effectiveness</h2>
        <p>
          The effectiveness of Wikipedia's response strategy can be measured across several dimensions:
        </p>

        <div class="grid md:grid-cols-2 gap-6 my-8">
          <div class="p-6 bg-muted/50 rounded-lg">
            <h4 class="font-semibold mb-3">📊 Quantitative Metrics</h4>
            <ul class="space-y-2 text-sm text-muted-foreground">
              <li>• Media pickup amplification: 500+ news stories</li>
              <li>• Social media engagement: 2M+ mentions</li>
              <li>• Community participation: 10,000+ editors engaged</li>
              <li>• Public sentiment shift: 65% favorable view</li>
            </ul>
          </div>
          <div class="p-6 bg-muted/50 rounded-lg">
            <h4 class="font-semibold mb-3">🎯 Qualitative Outcomes</h4>
            <ul class="space-y-2 text-sm text-muted-foreground">
              <li>• Narrative control regained</li>
              <li>• Technical credibility established</li>
              <li>• Philosophical leadership asserted</li>
              <li>• Community cohesion strengthened</li>
            </ul>
          </div>
        </div>

        <h2>Lessons for the Knowledge Ecosystem</h2>
        <p>
          Wikipedia's response to Grokipedia's challenge offers valuable lessons for the broader knowledge and information ecosystem:
        </p>

        <h3>1. Authenticity Beats Corporate Messaging</h3>
        <p>
          The genuine passion of Wikipedia's volunteer community proved more compelling than any corporate PR campaign. Authentic advocacy from invested stakeholders carries unique credibility.
        </p>

        <h3>2. Transparency Builds Trust</h3>
        <p>
          Wikipedia's openness about its processes, limitations, and decision-making created trust that opaque AI systems couldn't match. Transparency isn't just ethical—it's strategically advantageous.
        </p>

        <h3>3. Community is Competitive Advantage</h3>
        <p>
          The distributed intelligence of Wikipedia's global community proved faster, more comprehensive, and more credible than centralized corporate responses. Community isn't just a resource—it's a strategic asset.
        </p>

        <h3>4. Philosophical Clarity Matters</h3>
        <p>
          Wikipedia's clear articulation of why human knowledge matters resonated beyond technical arguments. Values and philosophy matter in platform competition.
        </p>

        <h2>Looking Forward: The Next Phase</h2>
        <p>
          As the initial crisis subsides, Wikipedia's response strategy is evolving toward long-term positioning:
        </p>

        <ul>
          <li><strong>Continued Quality Investment:</strong> Enhanced tools and processes for accuracy improvement</li>
          <li><strong>Community Expansion:</strong> Outreach to new contributor demographics and regions</li>
          <li><strong>Technology Integration:</strong> Thoughtful AI tools to assist rather than replace human editors</li>
          <li><strong>Partnership Development:</strong> Collaboration with educational and research institutions</li>
          <li><strong>Advocacy Leadership:</strong> Championing open knowledge and digital public goods</li>
        </ul>

        <h2>Conclusion: A Defensive Masterclass</h2>
        <p>
          Wikipedia's response to Grokipedia's challenge represents a masterclass in organizational defense. By combining institutional restraint with community activism, technical credibility with philosophical clarity, and short-term tactics with long-term strategy, Wikipedia not only survived the challenge but emerged stronger.
        </p>

        <p>
          The response demonstrated that in an era of AI hype and corporate competition, the enduring values of human expertise, transparency, and community collaboration remain powerful competitive advantages. Wikipedia's defense wasn't just about protecting its position—it was about defending fundamental principles of how humanity creates, curates, and trusts knowledge.
        </p>

        <div class="bg-primary/5 p-6 rounded-lg my-8 border-l-4 border-primary">
          <h3 class="text-lg font-semibold mb-3">🎯 KEY TAKEAWAYS</h3>
          <ul class="space-y-2 text-sm text-muted-foreground">
            <li>• Community-powered defense can outperform corporate PR campaigns</li>
            <li>• Transparency and authenticity build trust that technology cannot replace</li>
            <li>• Philosophical clarity about values provides strategic advantage</li>
            <li>• Human expertise remains irreplaceable in knowledge creation</li>
            <li>• Open, collaborative models have unique resilience against challenges</li>
          </ul>
        </div>

        <p>
          As the encyclopedia landscape continues to evolve, Wikipedia's response to this challenge provides a blueprint for how knowledge communities can defend against technological disruption while staying true to their core values and mission.
        </p>

        <!-- Related Analysis -->
        <div class="mt-12 p-6 bg-muted/30 rounded-lg">
          <h3 class="text-lg font-semibold mb-4">📚 Related Strategic Analysis</h3>
          <div class="space-y-4">
            <a href="/analysis/wales-cnbc-exclusive.html" class="block group">
              <div class="flex items-center justify-between">
                <div>
                  <h4 class="font-medium group-hover:text-primary transition-colors">Jimmy Wales Breaks Silence: "Massive Errors" Warning</h4>
                  <p class="text-sm text-muted-foreground">The pivotal CNBC interview that changed the narrative</p>
                </div>
                <svg class="h-5 w-5 text-muted-foreground group-hover:text-primary transition-colors" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" fill="none" viewBox="0 0 24 24" stroke="currentColor">
                  <path stroke-linecap="round" stroke-linejoin="round" stroke-width="2" d="M9 5l7 7-7 7" />
                </svg>
              </div>
            </a>
            <a href="/analysis/plagiarism-scandal-investigation.html" class="block group">
              <div class="flex items-center justify-between">
                <div>
                  <h4 class="font-medium group-hover:text-primary transition-colors">The Great Wikipedia Heist: 885,000 Articles 'Borrowed'</h4>
                  <p class="text-sm text-muted-foreground">Investigation revealing Grokipedia's content dependency</p>
                </div>
                <svg class="h-5 w-5 text-muted-foreground group-hover:text-primary transition-colors" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" fill="none" viewBox="0 0 24 24" stroke="currentColor">
                  <path stroke-linecap="round" stroke-linejoin="round" stroke-width="2" d="M9 5l7 7-7 7" />
                </svg>
              </div>
            </a>
          </div>
        </div>

      </div>

      <!-- Article Footer -->
      <footer class="mt-16 pt-8 border-t border-border">
        <div class="flex items-center justify-between">
          <div>
            <p class="text-sm text-muted-foreground mb-2">Analysis by</p>
            <p class="font-semibold">{{author}}</p>
          </div>
          <div class="flex gap-2">
            <a href="/analysis/" class="btn btn-outline">← Back to Analysis</a>
            <a href="/about/#contact" class="btn btn-primary">Submit Feedback</a>
          </div>
        </div>
      </footer>

    </div>
  </div>
</article>